Lowering Standards (Split from the You Always Remember Your First Time Thread.)

[MFS62]

In that thread, Batmags wrote:
“if you wanna pass your college math test, you have to provide the proper, precise, exact answers to the questions asked.”
and
“Let's let those people build our bridges and highways.”

That leads me to one of my pet peeves – the changing of what is important in our educational system. It is a microcosm of the lowering of standards in society – everyone gets a trophy, so why try hard to win?
Students are given credit when they get the formula and steps right even if the get the answer wrong. But students who get the answer right, without showing the work, get no credit, even if they are a math prodigy who does the problem in his (or her) head.

This is what happens when educators – professional theoreticians who have never taught children, design the curricula without the input of people who have actually taught. They either lose sight of how the information will be used or are unaware of the practicality of the real world..

As Batmags suggested, I would like to ask the math teacher who marked the paper (with the correct answer but not the steps) as wrong if they would drive over a bridge designed by the engineer who got the length of steel wrong. Would you?

No Trigonometric theorems were harmed in the writing of this post.
Later

[rchurch314]

I'm not sure a single thing you said there was true.

[MFS62]

Personal observation and (between my wife and myself)almost 30 years of educational experience in teaching, from elementary school through adult military and professional education.
And then living through the schooling of our kids and grandkids.
All true.
Later

[rchurch314]

That leads me to one of my pet peeves – the changing of what is important in our educational system. It is a microcosm of the lowering of standards in society – everyone gets a trophy, so why try hard to win?
Students are given credit when they get the formula and steps right even if the get the answer wrong. But students who get the answer right, without showing the work, get no credit, even if they are a math prodigy who does the problem in his (or her) head.

Well, education was never about "winning". I never got a trophy for Social Studies. But even if this was true, so what? Even in youth sports. Showing up, putting the work it, and participating and competing is EVERYTHING. All those good things about exercise, and teamwork, etc etc, are about playing the sport, being a good teammate and citizen. That deserves recognition! No one's fooled into thinking the participant medal they give to everyone is a replacement for winning, or is as good as winning, or is the ultimate prize.

This is what happens when educators – professional theoreticians who have never taught children, design the curricula without the input of people who have actually taught. They either lose sight of how the information will be used or are unaware of the practicality of the real world..

What's a professional theoretician? Is this a thing? I'm sure, like anywhere else, there are people peddling all sorts of junk. But no one's forcing schools to buy them, certainly not most state education departments. I'm constantly and consistently impressed by the programs and curriculum my children are being taught. It's awesome! Someone actually thought through this stuff with intention and it shows. Teachers were definitely involved.

What does "practicality of the real world" mean? They're being educated to understand process. Building blocks. How to learn and how to reason their way to the answer. All very valid "real world" skills.

As Batmags suggested, I would like to ask the math teacher who marked the paper (with the correct answer but not the steps) as wrong if they would drive over a bridge designed by the engineer who got the length of steel wrong. Would you?

No Trigonometric theorems were harmed in the writing of this post.
Later

What does that even matter? The purpose of education is to educate. The purpose of asking kids to show their work is to have them demonstrate they understand the process. Then when they get to a job of measuring steel, they know what to do, know how to adapt it for the specific situation, and can explain why it needs to be that length. There's no such thing as a "math prodigy", just because they naturally pick up some stuff a little easier. I was good as math as a kid, I was frequently the kid that didn't show my work enough. You know why? Because the way I did math in my head. (The way you do math in your head) is much closer to the way it's taught today, than it was taught, 20, 30, 40+ years ago. So now kids have to show their work, because the work is what demonstrates the understanding of number theory.

You still get points off for incorrect answers though, obviously. But better to show you understand the process, because if you don't but are still churning out correct answers, you're eventually going to hit a wall where you DON'T know the answers, and now you don't know how to get them either. I can see my kids doing some of the foundational building blocks for things like algebra, but they don't know what algebra is. In a few years, when they do, they'll have no problem with it as a result.


There is no lowering of standards. If anything they're higher. Getting into college, and then the workforce, can be cutthroat. The loans involved to pay for it can be predatory. Kids have to navigate becoming an adult, basically in public, as any right to privacy is eroded and so much of their growing, their teen angst, their struggles are right out there in public for the world to see.

[MFS62]

Then explain why America can't design and build competitive televisions, computers and cars for the domestic market.
And other nations are outstripping us in the ability to build latest generation combat jets and put people into space.
I believe it is because we are not doing a good enough job in teaching kids the math and science we need to compete in the world markets.
When in the past when people needed to build something, they used the abacus, slide rules and calculators. Today we have computers. The purpose of them all was to get the right answer.
The US used to have the highest education rate in the world. The last time I checked it had slipped to lower than tenth.
This is a contest we can't just be content showing up for. WE HAVE TO WIN.

Later

As Dennis Miller used to say, "Just my opinion and, I may be wrong".

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

I don't buy the premise behind this post either.

Lunchpail who just graduated high school is way more educated than I was at the same point and suffered no loss of competitive fire despite playing for 9 years in a recreational soccer league that didn't have playoffs but gave out lots of trophies.

And there are economic reasons TVs are made overseas.

[MFS62]

That's why I started the thread, for discussion, and I didn't want to derail the thread it was originally in.
Later

[metsmarathon]

Then explain why America can't design and build competitive televisions, computers and cars for the domestic market.
And other nations are outstripping us in the ability to build latest generation combat jets and put people into space.
I believe it is because we are not doing a good enough job in teaching kids the math and science we need to compete in the world markets.
When in the past when people needed to build something, they used the abacus, slide rules and calculators. Today we have computers. The purpose of them all was to get the right answer.
The US used to have the highest education rate in the world. The last time I checked it had slipped to lower than tenth.
This is a contest we can't just be content showing up for. WE HAVE TO WIN.

Later

As Dennis Miller used to say, "Just my opinion and, I may be wrong".

You’re wrong.

Electronics are not made here not because we are not smart enough to make them better.

They are made elsewhere because those places are cheaper places to build them.

Now you may look to Japanese cars and say aha, but they make better cars there! Which is not because they’re smarter at math and winning, but they had better management style. Systems engineering. Six sigma. That sort of thing. And perhaps a cultural willingness to try and implement those better strategies.

We still do a better job of engineering a lot of cool shit. Our military for instance is still the best most capable in the world with the most advanced stuff.

The difficulties we have for instance with the f35 is not because we suck at designing things but rather that we’re hamstrung in how we manage our engineering projects. We’re notably ahead of the rest of the world in military technology and nobody pushes the edge of the envelope more than us.

As to the point of lowering the standards for math with kids… giving partial credit is critical to evaluating whether a kid understands the underlying theory and made a simple mistake in keeping track of his numbers, or just doesn’t understand the concept. But more to forward the point… the kid who doesn’t understand the concept… do you want to encourage them to keep trying, or just tell them to quit because they’re stupid?

The standards get tighter and stricter as you go up in grade. Partial credit in college isn’t quite as appropriate as in grade school. But again, what’s the goal?

I had professors who would say “if you build bridge and make mistake, bridge fall down. No partial credit” and others who would grade the understanding of the thermodynamics principles rather than the ability to operate a calculator.

Both were effective instructors in their own right.

[rchurch314]

Then explain why America can't design and build competitive televisions, computers and cars for the domestic market.
And other nations are outstripping us in the ability to build latest generation combat jets and put people into space.
I believe it is because we are not doing a good enough job in teaching kids the math and science we need to compete in the world markets.
When in the past when people needed to build something, they used the abacus, slide rules and calculators. Today we have computers. The purpose of them all was to get the right answer.
The US used to have the highest education rate in the world. The last time I checked it had slipped to lower than tenth.
This is a contest we can't just be content showing up for. WE HAVE TO WIN.

Later

As Dennis Miller used to say, "Just my opinion and, I may be wrong".

This has nothing to do with education and everything to do with vulture capitalism. That education still thrives despite all the hurdles is a testament to all the hard-working teachers/educators/etc that have found ways to continue to push. Of course it could be better, and we should pay teachers much better, but it's come a long way. I also can't speak for republican run states that may be/have gutted educational stuff.

The biggest problem might simply be time. There's so much stuff that would be useful to learn and that changes constantly. And also need to be better at ignoring the whiny contingent that shows up to (half) of PTA meetings to protest new curriculum that tells children it's actually okay if a "boy" wants to wear a dress sometimes and repeats bad-faith lies about girls identifying as cats and demanding litter boxes.

Now you may look to Japanese cars and say aha, but they make better cars there! Which is not because they’re smarter at math and winning, but they had better management style. Systems engineering. Six sigma. That sort of thing. And perhaps a cultural willingness to try and implement those better strategies.

I've seen some TikToks about some really neat Chinese cars. I have no idea if they're "well made" or not, but the reason they're not sold here is not because they might not be well made, and all about Detroit, and lobbyists.

[MFS62]

About the quality of US military production:
I've seen a sole source manufacturer of turbine engines for the military lose their contract because the company that manufactured the transmissions into which the engines were supposed to fit couldn't measure their product properly. And they blamed the engine company.

And, BTW, I'm six sigma certified.

Later

[metsmarathon]

That doesn’t really make your point though.

Was the engineering faulty or the management / quality provisions?

One could argue that one of the biggest problems we face in engineering in the us is the focus on results over process - the resistance to doing things the right ways instead of pushing product out the door.

Is the inability to measure the transmissions the right way a fault of someone lowering their standards or just two groups not properly connecting the dots between two parts of the design? Seems more a systems engineering failure.

[MFS62]

The engines were manufactured to, and performed to, spec.
The folks who built the transmissions didn't measure the apertures into which the engine shaft was fitted according to that spec.
And their quality Control people didn't measure accurately enough to find, report and correct the error.
As a result, the engine shafts bound up and seized the engines.
It was the inability of people to measure correctly that cost hundreds of people their jobs.

You are right. One case doesn't prove anything. But it is one example, I'll provide you the names of the companies if you wish. PM me.
Later

[Edgy MD]

I can't see the words "PM me" without thinking of Joelmon.

[MFS62]

I can't see the words "PM me" without thinking of Joelmon.

Before my time.
Later

[Edgy MD]

From The Poetry of Joelmon

To A Picklehead

I have fun
Kiss my ass
if you don't like how I talk or write you picklehead,
I care less.
Now email me
you dick

[MFS62]

Now I see why that was memorable.
:)
Later

[RealityChuck]

Heck, even back in the 1960s, my calculus textbook had most of the answers in the back. The entire point back then was to learn the techniques, not just get the right answer.

If a math genius could get the answer by looking at it, having them cover the steps to it taught them why they got the answer. That's what they needed to learn; there would be times when the answer wasn't obvious at first sight, and real-world problems don't always have the same neat answers you seen textbooks.